RBrogen

Thanks Vync. In my case I have a previous SC condition 20% radiculopathy upper left and 20% radiculopathy upper right based on a "MILD" paralysis affecting all 3 radicular groups that was approved March 2019 with effective date of March 2018. In August of 2019, I had a C&P for another condition and during that C&P they rated my condition as "MODERATE" for all 3 radicular groups. I received the decision for the original condition claimed and then filed a HLR requesting, in part, that they consider the C&P report with documented severity change to be a sympathetic claim for increase on the radiculopathy conditions Upper Right at 40% (dominant) and Upper Left at 30% given that is the rating given for moderate severity. My HLR has been closed and there was no change in the radiculopathy ratings so I am assuming they have denied or ignored it. I am waiting on the decision letter now to know for sure which. I'm trying to get clarity on what the VA's responsibility is in a situation like this where another SC condition's severity has documented increase during a C&P for a completely separate condition. Are they required to consider that as a claim for increase in their requirement for Duty To Assist? I guess I'm just not clear as to what they are required to do under that Duty To Assist law.

I'm trying to get a better idea of what the VA's obligation is under the "duty to assist" veteran's with developing and adjudicating their claim. Scenario: During a C&P exam for condition "A", tests performed also proved that a previously service connected condition has worsened. Question: Does the VA have any obligation to view that evidence as a sympathetic claim for increase for the service condition that has worsened? Thanks as always!!!

Thanks Berta .... the 4 CUEs they called on themselves are in addition to the CUE claim I have open so I am hoping they will decide on my open cue that everyone helped me with which would be awesome!!! Keep up the good fight!

Yeah vets need to know that if they don't take the responsibility to do the research and see what is available, no one from the government is going to hand hold them and they will miss out on bennies! We have to take control of our own destiny from a claims, benefit perspective.

Don't know about other states but yes MA does pay $2000/yr. I definitely recommend searching for benefits in your state for vets and researching what is available. There are some nice bennies out there that many vets don't know about I would imagine.

Definitely ... I researched and found that MA has a $2,000 annuity for all 100% vets (paid $1,000 in Feb and $1,000 in Aug) of each year along with real estate tax, free college tuition etc. so definitely going to leverage that.

Thanks Bronco ... I appreciate it.

lol actually at 100% the college fund is already kicked in ... this would be grad school and a great vacation

It's sorta weird in that I sent my CUE in on 9/17 and I had 2 other claims going, 1 was a supplemental and the other was a high level review. The decision letter actually combines parts of both of those claims. I did confirm with VA that they are in receipt of the CUE that I sent in. Though one of the agents I spoke with asked me if I had filed it on the standard form and when I told her that there wasn't a specific form required for CUE, she said that most of the CUEs that she sees are sent in on the 21-526EZ so she was wondering if they would kick it back or not. The other agent I spoke with confirmed it was in the portal awaiting to be entered into the system and assigned so it is a wait and see. With now the scars, arthritis and meniscus now all SC, I'm hoping that all of those will also be awarded all the way back to 1999 which would take the rating from 20% to 60% for 20 years with wife and 1-3 kids. That would be life changing.

Yes but not related directly. It is great precedence given that my cue is exactly what they did here except I want them to date it back to 1999.

Yeah all scheduler based.

Thanks GBArmy ...I'm actually now 100% .... the 90% lasted for about 1 month before another decision came down that bumped me to 100% P&T.

Just got this in the mail today where the VA called CUE on themselves 4 times in one decision as well as adjusting rating for a sympathetic claim. They originally granted me 10% on each knee for arthritis ... I didn't know anything about being able to file for scars. They went back on their own and retroactively granted the scars for a year before which increased the rating I had at that time from 80% to 90%.

Right ... though I'm not sure that is the case because the two 10% ratings fall in the bilateral section which would make them approximately 21 on the rating schedule when combined. Then the head/face/neck painful scar is 20% after the bilateral affect which to me seems it would be higher result than just the straight 30%.

Hi Everyone, I'm curious as to the rating for painful scars that I got. I started with a rating of: Left Knee Painful Scars (2 scars): 10% Right Knee Painful Scars (2 scars): 10% and neck disfigurement scars (3 scars) 30%. They did not rate the neck scars properly for pain so I filed an HLR. After the HLR, they combined the 2 knee painful scars ratings along with my neck painful scars for a total rating of 30% for painful scars. My question is would it be a better outcome due to bilateral factor if they had kept the ratings separate and rated it like this: Left Knee Painful Scars (2 scars): 10% Right Knee Painful Scars (2 scars): 10% Head/Face/Neck Painful Scars (3 scars): 20%

I had a recent decision where they granted me shin splints but then combined the rating with a previous rating I had for left knee arthritis. The total rating was 10% which was what the arthritis was originally rated at. This doesn't make sense with the shin splint conditions noted in my C&P as "moderate" condition. Any thoughts would be appreciated.

VA staff do change but a lot of these examiners are in their position for years ... the main goal of the list would be to at least give someone a heads up that there have been issues before so they could do additional research on the facility. Had I know what I know now, I would have never gone to the Bedford VA for any C&P.

Yeah I do like to go to the top as well so I can get a sense of whether it is just an unknown issue or apathy at the top that allows this to go on. In my case, the person who I met with is the overall C&P dept head. They first heard it from the assistant medical chief who has been my main contact and has been following my case and then from me. The dept head said that they used it as a "training opportunity". Well if someone needs that much training, they shouldn't be in the position yet ... especially when it has such a huge impact on someone's life.

I guess in my case it really makes/made a difference because the Bedford facility only has 1 primary examiner for the entire facility, where as JP has numerous. Even one of the examiners of mine at JP said that there isn't uniform training and expectations across the board. JP has a great head of the department who stresses quality, thoroughness and look for every detail to help the vet ... if it isn't there then it isn't there but not to leave any stone unturned.

Completely agree with @GeekySquid. I've only been on the site a few months but have mad respect for @Berta and @Tbird. I had the bad C&P and the person is still there screwing up other's exams. I have pondered whether to take it up with the administrator or not since I did take it up with her direct supervisor who is the head of C&P at the facility.

I completely understand and get if a person is slandering someone .... that would be stupid on their part and they should be held accountable. However, if you are not using anyone's name and only list facility locations then that is no longer an issue overall other than some individual who can't articulate what they need to say without going overboard.

Hey @TBird ... completely understand. Wonder how the "Rate your MD" do it. To me knowing this information is as important, if not more than knowing info in your c-file. You can have the best info possible but if you have the crappy examiner, like I had in Bedford, your results will be horrible. Also, would it still be considered slander if no names are used, only locations?

I wasn't able to pick my examiners but I WAS ALLOWED to pick my C&P location which made all the difference for me. If vets are educated on the best places to go then it will help avoid the BS examiners and reduce their impact.

Hey @broncovet, @Buck52 what if the information is used to show the incompetence to the facility staff administrators? They are all on edge because of the latest rounds of gross negligence (ie. poor dying vet covered in ants 2 times in his hospice bed, or the multiple sexual assault cases). Now the administrators are thinking how to keep their assess out of jail and the more information that we publish and make public the more potential for positive change we can have.

I have used the public MD site to rate doctors in the past. I think it would be very helpful, and telling to see a list by state of vets experiences with c&p examiners